WaPo reluctantly reports Terry McAuliffe’s bald-faced debate lie.

It’s bad when the Washington Post can’t come up with a way to excuse a Virginia Democrat:

In the most obvious misstatement of the debate, [Democrat Terry] McAuliffe attacked [Republican Virginia Attorney General Ken] Cuccinelli over the findings of a Richmond prosecutor who had been tasked with investigating Cuccinelli’s financial disclosures.

“If you read the whole report, which I have, it says in here that the attorney general should have been prosecuted,” McAuliffe said, over Cuccinelli’s failure to disclose his stock holdings in Star Scientific and gifts from Williams. McAuliffe also said that because of Cuccinelli’s ties to Williams and Star, which filed a civil tax case against the state, “a judge took the case away from him because of a conflict of interest.”

Richmond Commonwealth’s Attorney Michael Herring said in a report last week that he found no evidence that Cuccinelli had violated the law. And it was Cuccinelli’s office that requested recusal from the civil tax case.

“So much is inaccurate,” Cuccinelli said when asked in the debate to respond, “I’ll let the fact checkers take care of it. That one’s gonna get sliced up.”

After the debate, McAuliffe sought to clarify his comment. “On the report — the attorney general could have been prosecuted if we had stronger disclosure laws in Virginia,” McAuliffe said, although Herring’s report did not make that assertion.

Via Ben Domenech; he calls it a blatant lie, I call it a bald-faced one. Doesn’t really matter which one of us is more correct; what matters is that McAuliffe stepped in it sufficiently that a staffer had to intercept him before McAuliffe did the post-debate press gaggle. Embarrassing, but not as embarrassing as having to come up with an off-the-cuff explanation as to why Terry McAuliffe uttered such a stupid, easily checked lie like that. Goodness knows that the real reason – he’s Terry McAuliffe, and simply not very good at campaigning – is something that can never, ever be admitted to…

Moe Lane (crosspost)

5 thoughts on “WaPo reluctantly reports Terry McAuliffe’s bald-faced debate lie.”

  1. Okay Moe, should we be worried about McDonnell? Is his scandal the real deal? Or nothing to worry about?

    1. Danged if I know. The Democrats should have found somebody more credible on cronyism than McAuliffe to run, I know that much.

    2. The thing to worry about is if it can be used to tar Cuccinelli. So far, not really, but enough time and effort can sometimes get unfair things to stick.

      McDonnell’s career is pretty much done in VA once his term is over. He’s got no shot at unseating either of the Dem Senators, not after the tax increase fiasco.

      1. Well that’s just dandy, dagnabit I was counting on McDonnell to take on Warner.

  2. When I first heard McAuliffe was running for governow, I thought it was a joke. Then again, I thought the same thing about -now- Senator Stuart Smalley. Terry might be the most corrupt of the Clinton cronies and the thought that the might become governor of my home state actually nauseates me.

    Never underestimate the WaPo’s macaca ability to either over hype a nothing burger into Watergate part XXVI, or to simply ignore things that cast Democrats into a negative light. And since this fine state has voted for Barry twice, I’ve got no confidence in this year’s gubernatorial election results.

Comments are closed.